The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant of misunderstanding of facts only saw C with vain in va, and there was no fact to scinate C.

(In the original trial, the defendant was found guilty on the premise that the defendant was led to confession, but the defendant was found guilty only of vain in the original trial, and the facts charged were not recognized as it was). (B)

The defendant's act constitutes self-defense in order to defend the defendant's unfair infringement caused by violence of the other party.

C. The lower court’s sentencing (fine 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s leg part on one occasion can be sufficiently recognized as supporting the Defendant’s bridge part on one occasion.

In accordance with the investigation report, which is evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the parts and frequency of the assault shall be modified ex officio without the procedure of modification of indictment to the extent that it does not substantially disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

B. In light of the foundation and developments leading up to and after the dispute over the records of this case as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, and the purpose and means of the defendant's defense and the intent of the defendant, etc., the defendant's act appears to be beyond the limit of passive defense as a means of resistance to protect himself/herself from the illegal attack of the victim and escape therefrom. Thus, the defendant's self-defense

C. The motive, background, means, and consequence of the instant crime, and other Defendant’s age, character, behavior, career, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc. are included in the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing.